Apple and Samsung today submitted their witness lists for an upcoming retrial in the long running patent infringement battle between the two companies, reports CNET.

Neither Apple CEO Tim Cook nor design chief Jony Ive will be taking the stand, but several other notable figures will be providing testimony during the retrial. Apple will call Richard Howarth, a senior director on the Apple Design Team, along with Greg Joswiak, vice president of product marketing.

Howarth will discuss the design process at Apple, the design patents that were infringed upon, and other design topics, says CNET, while Joswiak will talk about Apple's marketing approach for its devices and the competitive nature of the smartphone market.

Apple also plans to call Susan Kare, who designed many of the early icons for Apple's Macintosh computers, to talk about icon and user interface graphics design. Other witnesses include Ravin Balakrishnan, a professor of computer science; Alan Ball, an industrial design expert; Julie Davis, a consultant with expertise in damages analysis; and Karan Singh, another computer science professor.

Samsung will call Justin Dension, its senior vice president of mobile product strategy and marketing, along with Drew Blackard, senior director of product marketing and Jinsoon Kim, a vice president at Samsung's Corporate Design Center.

Apple and Samsung's latest damages retrial will kick off on Monday, May 14, with the aim of determining how much Samsung has to pay Apple for infringing on three Apple design patents.

The two companies have been fighting in court since 2011, when Apple sued Samsung for copying the iPhone's design. Apple was initially awarded $1 billion in 2012, but after several appeals and retrials, the award was reduced to $548 million.

Samsung paid Apple the $548 million in 2015, with $399 million of that total awarded to Apple for the design patent infringements. Samsung at the time argued that it was asked to pay a "disproportionate" sum for the design violation, and appealed to the Supreme Court to reduce that portion of the award.

Apple had been awarded damages based on the full value of the infringing device, while Samsung argued that it should pay damages based only on the infringing portion.

During the retrial, Samsung will argue that the damages awarded to Apple should be less than the original award because the infringed Apple patents represent only a small part of the design of the entire Samsung smartphone in question. Apple, meanwhile, will argue that it deserves damages based on the full value of the device.

Top Rated Comments

It keeps going because Apple is two faced. They want Samsung to pay a percentage of the total cost of the Galaxy phone for copying the rectangle shape of the phone. That includes all the tech inside it too that Samsung didn't copy.

Mean while in the other court room with Apple and Qualcomm, Apple is saying they shouldn't have to pay a percentage of the total cost of the iPhone for using Qualcomm modem tech.

You can say all the tech inside doesn't mean the entire device was copied but search what Samsung phones looked like before the iPhone was released and then after... They blatantly copied everything they could. They knew the tech Apple put inside (weren't they suppliers back then as well?)

The difference in a full touch screen device and the old candybar phones would be huge. Android changed all the software too. Samsung deliberately chose the look and feel to be as similar as possible with their UI skin. And if that wasn't enough, they could have chosen any number of screen layouts but they even went as far as the rounded app buttons in the same grid. If you stood a few feet back, it would be hard for regular people to tell the difference.

The only ones getting rich out of this are the lawyers. It should have been settled years ago.

Samsung is probably worried if they lose (again) other companies they have copied are finally going to have a shot at them too for white goods they were "inspired" by.

Maybe patent law needs to be simplified. So much relies on previous work now it must be hard not to infringe and patent trolls think they can make money without ever building a product. What defines a product is the whole hardware, software, UI, OS, app store and overall feel. Breaking down what percentage each bit contributes is difficult. The sum of the parts...

Jobs famously said they'd patented the hell out of this. They maybe should have tested those patents earlier.

I agree with -BigMac-: even Apple probably doesn't care for this lawsuit now. When you see how much of the market profit Apple captures does it really matter any more?

It keeps going because Apple is two faced. They want Samsung to pay a percentage of the total cost of the Galaxy phone for copying the rectangle shape of the phone. That includes all the tech inside it too that Samsung didn't copy.

Mean while in the other court room with Apple and Qualcomm, Apple is saying they shouldn't have to pay a percentage of the total cost of the iPhone for using Qualcomm modem tech.

how is that similar at all?? Qualcomm's business model is to license their stuff out, they just wanted MORE from Apple than other vendors cause Apple has more money. Apple never licensed the design out to Samsung

Companies like Samsung can get away with blatantly copying the style, layout, and underlying principal of a profitable device like the iPhone because courts have absolutely no power in righting this wrong. Even if Apple wins, they'll get pennies on the dollar compared to real damages. The market favors theft of intellectual property.

You really seriously believe that no one would buy a phone that doesn't look like an iPhone, when about 90% of the world buys phones today that look nothing like an iPhone, and did so at the time it was released? Other than a few minor things, it didn't look like a clone at the time, and now looks completely different. The iPhone has never had any significant market share. The fact that this case is still going on is kind of ridiculous.

Wow, where to even start with your blizzaro upside-down universe reality distortion.

Just about every single smart phone on the planet now emulates the essential design of the iPhone, a look that was first made insanely popular with the iPhone. For all of those who post it is an "obvious and inevitable design" I argue if it was so obvious why did it not catch on until Apple introduced the iPhone?

The iPhone has never had significant market share??? Never? Check out this chart ('https://www.statista.com/chart/3784/iphone-market-share/') and how Apple's market share of iPhones vs. the hundreds of others. Or this article ('https://www.investopedia.com/news/apple-global-smartphone-market-share-more-50-first-time/') recognizing Apple having 50% of the iPhone market worldwide last quarter.

If you are being paid to troll you certainly aren't earning your money here.

Apple needs to pound Samsung into the ground just so this doesn't happen to anyone else again.

If you can argue that you only copied 1% so you should be charged 1% then the whole idea of a patent or copyright is ridiculous. If you needed that 1% so your product would sell then you should be penalized for the price of the entire product.

MacRumors attracts a broad audience
of both consumers and professionals interested in
the latest technologies and products. We also boast an active community focused on
purchasing decisions and technical aspects of the iPhone, iPod, iPad, and Mac platforms.